DESIGN AND LAYOUT OF

SPIRAL SEPARATION PLANT

(Industrial project for Indian Rare Earths Ltd., Chavara)

GUIDED BY: PRESENTED BY: Anandhu.R.S (8324)

Akash.B (8310)
Prof. Muhammed Zakkeer Anson.P.John (8326)
Visak.S.Lal (8455)
Mr. Balamuralikrishna (Sr.
Manager, IREL)
 CONTENTS
• INTRODUCTION
• LITERATURE REVIEW
• PROBLEM DEFINITION
• PROCESS FLOW CHART
• PROJECT METHODOLOGY
• WORK DONE
• RESULTS
• CONCLUSION
• REFERENCES
 INTRODUCTION
•IREL Chavara carries out mining of Heavy Minerals
(Titanium Ores)along the Chavara coast.
•They are planning on extending mining activities to
a location 60km away from the current site.
•Preconcentration plant for removing waste
material is necessary
• The plant must be capable of processing 9 lacs of
beach sand per annum.
•The entire technical design of this plant has been
carried out.
 LITERATURE REVIEW
• A.B Holland-Batt et al. developed techniques for predicting the
primary fluid profile and secondary circulation on spiral troughs[1]
• A.B Holland-Batt et al. discusses the design considerations of spiral
separators in detail the parapemets which govern the design of
spiral ancillaries.[2]
• J.D Grobler et al. presents a modification of the conventional triple
spline used to predict spiral concentrator recoveries.[3]
• R.Sivamohan et al. discusses the different stages of the mechanism
of concentration in spiral concentrators. The significance of many
design and operational variables and their interrelationships are
examined. [4]
• C.Kari et al., experimentally studied spiral behaviour subjecting to
different operating parameters like feed flow rate, feed pulp density
and splitter positions. Also, the efforts were made to quantify the
effect of the slimes on the separation efficiency of spirals.[5]
 LITERATURE REVIEW(CONTD.)
• P. Bhattacharya et al. carried out studies on beach placer samples of
Kerala coast Characterisation studies involved size and chemical analyses,
sink and float studies, optical microscopy and scanning electron
microscopy. [6]
• A.S. Siddiqui et al presented the nature of formation of the beach sand
deposits containing the heavy minerals,the mining activities undertaken and
the preliminary separation in the wet plants to discard the gangue minerals
at the site of mining itself;and then the various processing techniques
involved in the separation of the individual minerals. [7]
• A.W Jenike et al. identified the criteria that affect material flow in storage
vessels. Jenike developed the theory and methods to apply the theory,
including the equations and measurement of the necessary material
properties. [8]
• S. Wiche et al. developed design principles for wet solids concentrator
vessels by applying Jenike mass flow design principles to wet solids.[9]
 PROBLEM DEFINITION
• To design a preconcentration spiral plant.
• The concentration of Heavy Mineral content
in the beach sand is to be increased from
30% to 70%.
• The plant should make optimum use of
water.
• The capital and operational costs must be
the minimum possible.
PROCESS FLOW CHART
 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
• To prepare the process flow chart
• To select an industry standard spiral
• To design the steel structure
• To design an effective solids handling
system
• To design an effective slurry handling and
transport system
• To prepare an integrated 3D layout of the
plant.
 PROJECT METHODOLOGY
• Mineralogical study
• Development of process flow chart
• Selection of equipment ( spirals, slurry pumps,
valves, pipes)
• Design of solids handling system
• Design of slurry transport system
• Design of structure and optimization using ETABS
software
• Development of integrated plant layout using
AUTOCAD PLANT 3D
 WORK DONE
SELECTION OF SPIRAL
BASIC TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
• FEED RATE,F – Rate at which raw material is
processed.
• FEED GRADE,f – Concentration of mineral in raw
material on mass basis

• CONCENTRATE GRADE,c – Concentration of valuable mineral in

product on mass basis

• RECOVERY,R – Ratio of amount of valuable mineral

in concentrate to amount of feed

• MASS RATE OF
CONCENTRATE,C
SELECTION OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
Given Data

• Feed grade, f = 30%

• Concentrate grade, c = 70%
• Total feed rate/ capacity, T = 125 tph
• The size range of heavy mineral particles
is 75 to 500 microns[2].
 SELECTION OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
EQUATION USED

•
SELECTION OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
DETERMINATION OF THE TYPE OF SPIRAL
SELECTION OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF TURNS
SELECTION OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
DETERMINATION OF OPERATING PARAMETERS OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
SELECTION OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
DETERMINATION OF OPERATING PARAMETERS OF SPIRAL
SELECTION OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
DETERMINATION OF OPERATING PARAMETERS OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
SELECTION OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)
DETRMINATION OF NUMBER AND CONFIGURATION OF SPIRALS
• Three 10×2 three start spirals, each operating at a feed
rate per start of 1.5 tph gives a total capacity of 135 tph.
SELECTION OF SPIRAL(CONTD.)

• Six turn spiral with 3 starts- MG 6.3 is selected.

• The required recovery = 96%.
• The feed rate is 1.5 tph per start.
• Pulp density 35% for optimum spiral
performance.
• Three 10×2 three start spirals gives a total
capacity of 135 tph
• The total volumetric flow rate is 3.44 m3/hr.
• The efficiency of the spiral is 76%.
PUMP SELECTION

Slurry pumps are a heavy and robust

version of centrifugal pumps, capable of
handling tough and abrasive duties
Selection factors are
• Flow rate
• Total head
• Particle size
 PUMP SELECTION(CONTD.)

Mass of solids =𝑀𝑠 = 135tph

𝑀𝑆
Pulp density= = 35%
𝑀𝑆 +𝑀𝑊
Mass of water=𝑀𝑤 =250 tph
Vl = limiting velocity =
𝑆−𝑆𝐿
Fl × 2𝑔𝐷 𝑆𝐿

Fl = flow parameter =1.08

Diameter of pipe =200mm
 PUMP SELECTION (CONTD.)
Limiting vel =Vl=2.42 m/s
Volume of solids, 𝑉𝑆 =16.45 l/s
Volume of water 𝑉𝑊 =69.44l/s
Total volume = 85.89l/s≈90l/s
𝑇𝑂𝑇𝐴𝐿 𝑉𝑂𝐿𝑈𝑀𝐸
Actual vel = = 2.74m/s
𝐴𝑅𝐸𝐴

FRICTIONAL LOSS=11m FOR

100m PIPE LINE
FRICTIONAL HEAD LOSS≈4m
 PUMP SELECTION (CONTD.)

Total height of operation=16mHead

Correction factor=0.8
16
Head in terms of water=0.8=20m
PUMP SELECTION (CONTD.)

Assuming head due to

contraction and bending ≈ 2m

Total head=20+4+2
=26≈30m
EFFICIENCY=77%
Working speed is 1100RPM
PUMP SELECTION(CONTD.)
𝑄∗𝐻∗𝑆𝐿
• Power = 𝐸𝐹𝐹𝐼𝐶𝐼𝐸𝑁𝐶𝑌 = 41kw
So 60kw motor is selected
• NPSHR for the pump system to operate without cavitating.
6
• NPSH required = 1.245 = 4.81m
• NPSH actual = Hatm −Hvap − Hsuc + Hfriction = 8.19-0.49-
1+2=8.7m
Since, NPSHA>NPSHR cavitation is absent
DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURE
• Model of the steel structure is first developed using
ETABS.
DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURE(CONTD.)
FLOOR PLAN
DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURE(CONTD.)
• Next, the load to be applied on the structure is
calculated.
• The following loads are considered:
1. Dead load
2. Live load
3. Wind load
• The total load due to a single spiral bank is
71.5 kN.
• The effective load is taken as 100 kN for one
single bank.
DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURE (CONTD.)
OPTIMUM SECTIONS OBTAINED USING ETABS ANALYSIS
DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURE (CONTD.)
DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURE (CONTD.)
DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURE (CONTD.)
DESIGN OF CONVEYOR SYSTEM
• CONVEYOR SPECIFICATIONS

Capacity (TPH) -Required =135 TPH

Distance center to center (L) =15m
Height (H) =3m
Density of beach sand (Kg/m^3) =1.8-2.2 kg/m3
Slope of conveyor =12.8 degree
Angle of Surcharge, =10 degrees
Density =1800Kg/m3
Troughing angle selected as 30 degrees
DESIGN OF CONVEYOR SYSTEM(CONTD.)
 DESIGN OF CONVEYOR SYSTEM(CONTD.)
• BELT WIDTH =500mm
• BELT SPEED (S) =1.3m/s
• CAPACITY =140TPH
• DISTANCE CENTER TO CENTER (L) =15m
• HEIGHT (H) =3m
• MAXIMUM CAPACITY TO BE HANDLED @ DENSITY=2.2kg/m3 (C)
=172 TPH

• EFFECTIVE TENSION =2343 N

• POWER =3.05KW
DESIGN OF CONVEYOR SYSTEM(CONTD.)

• Selected pulley –single unsnubbed bare

pulley
• Angle of wrap =1800
• Dry friction coefficient(𝜇)=0.3
• Drive coefficient(ξ)=2
1
• 𝑇2 = 𝑇𝑒 × ξ × = 1500 N
𝑒 μφ −1
 SELECTION OF PULLEY(CONTD.)

• Maximum tension (T1) =Te+T2

=3843 N
• Maximum working tension (Factor of Safety=10)
=38430 N
• Maximum working tension (per unit belt width)
=77 kN/m
• Power =Te ×s =3.05 KW
• Selected drive 5.5kw ,1450rpm
SELECTION OF PULLEY(CONTD.)
DESIGN OF HOPPER
FLOW MODES IN A HOPPER
DESIGN OF HOPPER(CONTD.)
HOPPER FLOW PROBLEMS
DESIGN OF HOPPER(CONTD.)
 DESIGN OF HOPPER(CONTD.)
JOHANSSEN EQUATION
 DESIGN OF HOPPER(CONTD.)
• The required discharge rate of sand is 135 tph = 37.5 kg/s.
• For pyramidal hopper with square outlet, the parameter m in Johanssen
equation = 1.
• B is the characteristic dimension of the hopper outlet which is equal to the
side of the square opening.
• Area of the opening = B2
• Now substituting in Johanssen equation we get
𝐵 × 9.087
37.5 = 1800 × 𝐵2
2(1 + 1 ) × 𝑡𝑎𝑛 36
which gives,
𝐵 = 0.169𝑚
 DESIGN OF HOPPER(CONTD.)
𝐿−𝐵
• From the geometry of the hopper,tan 𝜃 =
2×𝐻
L is the dimension of the square inlet and H is the
hopper height.
• The volume of a square truncated pyramid is
given by
𝐻
• 𝑉= × (𝐿2 + 𝐿 × 𝐵 + 𝐵2 )
3
• 𝐿 = 2.97𝑚
• The corresponding height is
• 𝐻 = 1.93𝑚
 DESIGN OF CONSTANT DENSITY SLURRY
TANK

• Used to homogenise the slurry fed into the

Wet Concentrator Plant
• Promote conditions for optimum mineral
separating efficiency
• Optimum slope corresponding to given
solid must be used to prevent ‘sloughing
off’
• Detention time = 1 min
DESIGN OF CONSTANT DENSITY SLURRY
TANK(CONTD.)
VOLUME CALCULATION
• Volume flow rate of sand = 135 TPH/density
= 59.21 m3/hour
• Volume flow rate of water = 250.71 m3/hour (for
slurry density of 35%)
• Total volume flow rate = 310 m3 /hour
• Taking detention time as 1 minute, volume of
tank = 310/60 = 5.166 m3
DESIGN OF CONSTANT DENSITY SLURRY
TANK(CONTD.)
TANK DIMENSIONS
• Level of water in tank = 2m
• Diameter of cylindrical portion = 2m
• Conical angle is 450
• Height of cylindrical part = 1.8m (0.3m clearance)
• Volume of bottom conical portion = πh(R2 + Rr + r2)/3=
0.916 m3
• Volume of cylindrical portion = πR2H = 4.712 m3
• Total allowable volume of tank = .916 + 4.712=5.628m3
DESIGN OF CONSTANT DENSITY SLURRY
TANK(CONTD.)
DESIGN OF CONSTANT DENSITY SLURRY
TANK(CONTD.)
PLATE THICKNESS CALCULATION
• Number of Shell Coures =2
• Thickness of 1st Course, t = (50xGxDx(H-0.3)/σaxE) + C
(Page 22&23 of IS:803)
• Course Under consideration, n = 1
• Height from Bottom of course to the top, H = Ht - ((n-1) x Ws) = 1.8m
• Thickness of 1st Course, t = 1.65mm
• Thickness of 1st Course Considered, ts1 = 5mm (minimum
thickness)
• Thickness of 2nd Course, t = (50xGxDx(H-0.3)/σaxE) + C
• Course Under consideration, n = 2
• Height from Bottom of course to the top,H= Ht - ((n-1) x Ws) = 1.5m
• Thickness of 2nd Course, t = 1.6mm
• Thickness of 2nd Course Considered, ts2 = 5mm
• Average thickness of tank shell,t = 5mm
• As per API 650 minimum nominal thickness of ¼ inch (6.35mm) is chosen
for the bottom plate.
 RESULT
• PLANT LAYOUT IS PREPARED
• MG 6.3 SRIRAL IS SELECTED
• 6/4 SLURRY PUMP
• 135TPH CAPACITY CONVEYOR AND
HOPPER DESIGNED
• CPD TANK IS DESIGNED
 CONCLUSION
• A spiral separation plant that can effectively
process 9 lakhs of beach sand annually has
been designed.
• Structural analysis using ETABS software led to
reduction in quantity of steel required.
• Net savings of company due to installation of
plant - Rs 9.5 crore per annum.
 REFERENCES
1. Holland-Batt, A. B. (1994). The dynamics of sluice and spiral separators, Minerals Engineering,
Vol.8, No. 11, 1361-1390
2. Holland-Batt, A. B. (1995). Some design considerations for spiral separators, Minerals
Engineering, Vol.8, No. 1/2, 3-21.
3. Grobler, JD, Nande, N & Zietsman, JH 2016, 'Enhanced Holland-Batt spline for describing spiral
concentrator performance', Minerals Engineering, vol. 92, pp. 189-195.
4. Sivamohan, R., and Forssberg, E., 1985, Principles of spiral concentration, International
Journal of Mineral Processing, 15, pp. 503-519.
5. Chandrakala, K., Gajanan, K. and Mohanrao, S., 2005, Effect of operating parameters on the
performance of spiral concentrator, Proceedings of International conference on Mineral
Processing and Extractive Metallurgy (ICME), pp. 43-51
6. P. Bhattacharyya, B. Nayak, R. Singh & S.C. MaulikN.R: Studies on Beach Placers of Kerala
Coast, NML Publication, pp.93-99, 2000.
7. A.S. Siddiqui, A. K. Mohapatra and J. V. Rao, Separation of Beach sand Minerals,NML
Publication, pp 114-126, 2000.
8. Jenike, A.W., Storage and Flow of Solids. Bulletin 123 Utah Engineering Experiment Station,
University of Utah, Utah,1964
9. S. Wiche and I. Lecreps-Prigge, Applicability of Jenike mass flow design principles to wet solids
vessel design. In proceeding of the Conference “PARTEC 2013”, Nürnberg, Germany, April 23-
25, 2013
THANK YOU